As data on COVID-19 is being collected at an unprecedented volume, a picture seems to be emerging about the nature of this virus. The bottom line is that although COVID-19 is indeed a very bad and lethal virus, it could have been a lot worse.

In terms of its infection rates, COVID-19 is worse than seasonal flu but nowhere near as bad as viruses like measles and mumps that can spread further and faster. In terms of the number of people who catch the disease and suffer major health problems, or even die, COVID-19 is much worse than influenza but not as bad as Ebola, avian influenza, or its relatives SARS and MERS. And in terms of how quickly COVID-19 mutates, which is a rough proxy for how difficult it will be to find a vaccine, it is again in the middle of the ballpark and we know of lots of viruses that mutate or completely rearrange their genetic material more quickly, like influenza viruses.

What this means is that, unfortunately, this pandemic could have been much more serious, and we know that the world of viruses can throw a lot worse at us. For instance, the highly pathogenic avian influenza virus H5N1 is far more lethal and is only a few mutations away from gaining the ability of human-to-human transmission. A highly pathogenic avian influenza virus, which can be transmitted from humans to humans, could probably kill tens of millions (as did the Spanish flue of 100 years ago). Consider a scenario where a virus hits, the mortality rate is closer to 40-50 per cent, and it is mainly people who are in their prime working age that fall victim. If that pandemic ever strikes – and such a scenario is not unlikely — the cost could be in the trillions for the global economy if we’re not better prepared.

But rather than dwell on such nightmares, it may be more appropriate to consider what we are learning right now about how to respond to this sort of problem.

With today’s massive public health response in terms of closing institutions, shuttering restaurants, cancelling entertainment and sports events, and closing down borders, we are in essence engaged in one of the biggest public health mobilizations the world has ever seen. And from this we are going to be in a much better position to know how to respond to a future crisis. To what extent do the extraordinary social distancing measures reduce transmission and save lives? What aspects of closing institutions and businesses are the most important and effective? What is working and what doesn’t work?

Thanks to the data being currently collected, we will be in a much better position to answer these sorts of questions in the weeks and months to come. And this will mean that all of us, from international institutions right down to individual households, will be better equipped to handle these sorts of circumstances if they should ever occur again.

In conclusion, it’s possible that part of the COVID-19 legacy may provide us with something of a silver lining. We are suffering through a massive disruption that will make countless people sick, will claim many lives and is ravaging the economy. And COVID-19 is testing our ability to respond to a global pandemic. In doing so, it is also forcing us to up our game by helping us develop the contingency plans, public health protocols, and infrastructure to protect critical services in times of massive disruption.

In some ways, therefore, COVID-19 may act as a sort of inoculant for society at large. It may help boost our global adaptive capacity so that if a truly lethal pandemic emerges, perhaps a highly pathogenic avian influenza pandemic, then thanks to the training we are all receiving now, society, community, and the economy may be better equipped to adapt. We truly hope this isn’t the case, but in this dark moment seeking silver linings may not be uncalled for.

Shayan Sharif is the associate dean, research and graduate studies at the Ontario Veterinary College at the University of Guelph. Evan Fraser is the director of the University of Guelph’s Arrell Food Institute.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.